Reviews - The Spy Who Loved Me

Doesn't really match up with the rest of the series and overall isn't anything amazing, though not nearly as bad as people make it out to be because of some of the dated and questionable lines, seems to be a lot of hate because the men in the main characters life are pricks but it's not exactly like Fleming is endorsing their behaviour, in fact it's pretty critical when you actually bother to read between the lines, Fleming certainly writes male characters better than female but he does an alright job, main thing is it just wasn't that interesting a story till the end, I'd only recommend it for the completionist.

seano312's review against another edition

Go to review page

1.0

Ian Fleming, 50s misogynist, probably made a huge mistake telling this story from a woman’s POV. He lost me at “All woman love semi-rape.”

Bond doesn’t show up until 40% of the way, and it’s a typical bad guys stand off good guys at a upstate New York motel. Tbh, it’s something Chandler or Thompson would have done better.

It’s a poor story, poorly told. The only redeeming factor: it is quite short.

Unless you’re a James Bond die-hard, skip it.

stuntedbluntman's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous tense medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? Yes
Loveable characters? N/A

3.0

drkottke's review against another edition

Go to review page

3.0

Although this book is often labeled "experimental," it's really a pretty conventional hardboiled noir story of a fallen woman in distress, who calls upon the services (and killer instincts) of a mysterious stranger. The only things "experimental" about it are an introduction from Ian Fleming on the supposed provenance of the manuscript, first-person narration from said woman in distress, and Bond's late appearance in the story. The overall story is entertaining and well-executed, albeit frequently sexist. The 1977 movie is a better Bond movie than the book is a Bond book, but in the Roger Moore era, that's not saying much. It simply borrows the title of this novel, then tells a completely different story, a globe-trotting adventure that borrows elements from other, better Bond films (e.g. ski chases, a train fight with a Russian henchman, sharks)and throws in a few wink-wink jibes at other pop culture phenomena from the mid-70s (e.g. human henchman Jaws wrestles a shark ... and wins!). It's less campy than "Moonraker," despite having a similar supervillain scheme, and more politically correct than "Live and Let Die," but not quite as clever with the source material as "For Your Eyes Only." I do have a soft spot for it in my movie viewing history, as one of my favorite Matchbox vehicles was Bond's amphibious car, and it's not only the first Bond movie I can remember seeing on TV, but one of the first ones for which I can remember enjoying the Mad Magazine parody.

chrisnin64's review against another edition

Go to review page

1.0

Just awful. Bond doesn't come in until 75% into the novel. The first two parts are spent with Viv, the protagonist, explaining her awful love life. One of which is in abuse, the other ends in abortion. It is a very bad novel. Then, Bond is there for a little bit and eventually just ends up leaving her after explaining what happened after Thunderball. Never again..

brandondorf's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark emotional reflective sad medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? Complicated
Loveable characters? Complicated
Diverse cast of characters? Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.0

Quick Look
Plot = .50
Characters = .50
Promise = .25
Engagement = .75
Efficiency = 1

simonbillinton's review against another edition

Go to review page

3.0

This is a curates egg of a Bond book. Mostly because it's not really about Bond at all who only turns up two thirds of the way through. And it's odd because in some ways, it would've been a better story if this wasn't a Bond book at all, but just a standalone story Ian Fleming had written about the main character, Vivian, and her life.
Considering who wrote it and when, a Fleming coming of age story about a woman could've been a disaster, but its portrayal of some of the realities of life for young women in the 1950s rings sort of true, if a little one dimensional. Yes there are some dodgy sexual politics but that's the realities of the 1950s.
Anyway, it's an oddity that doesn't add anything to the James Bond canon, but is an interesting insight into Ian Fleming the author.

pdwelch's review against another edition

Go to review page

2.0

I'm trudging through the original Bond novels and this one was not one of the best. James doesn't show up until the last third of the book and then only to save the day. It's not a spy novel at all. Honestly, it kind of sucked.

More...