I prefer my original hard covers

They ripped this idea off Pink Floyd, methinks.

I've never seen those, or read any Ian Fleming, but I like those covers.

>james bond
sure is 12 year olds in here

They clash a lot less than the recent but old Paperback bond covers. More retro vintage. They're not pretending the covers aren't concealing riveting pulp action.

>>306853
>methinks
iliterate detected

>>306864
sure is literary snobbery in here.

Ian Fleming once formulated a plan to use Aleister Crowley to end WWII. You gotta admit, that is rather bad-arsed my chap.

The Bond movies bore the shit out of me; how likely is it that I will enjoy the books?

>>306884
All signs point to no

>>306884
The books are better than the films. There's a lot of crap that got cut out of the movies that shows up in Bond's original character.

For example, You Only Live Twice is more racist than you can possibly imagine. You'll bet your arse they couldn't put that stuff in a mainstream movie.

>>306870
NIGGER DETECTED HO HO HO

>>306899
that doesn't sound like a good thing at all!

>>306878

How, by giving a face seance where Thor commands Hitler to surrender to the allies?

>>306914
Ultimately Bond in the books is a dickhole towards everyone who isn't signing his paycheck. He's a professional, and he was unfortunately a product of his time.

Keep in mind they were written in the aftermath of WWII when a lot of those old world British attitudes of Empire were still present. Just don't go in expecting Sean Connery or Roger Moore on the page.

There are points when Bond isn't a dickhole, for example On Her Majesty's Secret Service shows you it is entirely possible for him to avoid this so long as nobody... I won't spoil it...

>>306918
He didn't have to use his plan, but I think it had something to do with Crowley infiltrating the ranks of the SS who were studying up on how to use the occult to win the war. Then D-Day happened which was a much better idea.

>>306929

So basically Daniel "suck my balls, bitch" Craig is the best Bond so far?

>>306937
You're thinking of Daniel "I got hit in the balls" Craig, who did a good job but I would have liked to have seen a Bond movie where the Cold War setting is done like Mad Men in historical accuracy.

>>306918

fake*

>>306937

I heard he wanted to have Bond do a gay experience scene. I would have to say that's the worst interpretation of a literary character ever

>>306929
Are there hot steamy erotic chapters?

People hated Timothy Dalton because his Bond was unfunny but he was the truest to the source. I really liked The Living Daylights. Licence to Kill has him go overboard, but it was quintessential Bond.

>>306878

And thus why I don't even bother /lit/.

The books are way better than the movies. I hate almost all the movies except the Connery ones and the last one wasn't too bad. I read Goldfinger because I had no other books at the time and was damn glad I did The movies are just like any movies based on books. Dumbed down with important plot points removed. For instance in the Goldfinger book Pussy Galore is a much more important character. She's a badass dyke who Bond seduces.

There's some absolutely hilarious stuff in the Bond stories.
I can't remember exactly which story it's from, I think it was The Man with the Golden Gun, Bond informs the reader of the well known fact that homosexuals are incapable of whistling.

Those covers are awesome and are making me contemplate reading some of these books. Should I do it?