It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Not sure what you're getting at here? I was talking about the scripts when OHMSS was originally set to be the next Bond movie after both GF and then TB. There were numerous treatments that had evolved since the post-GF script by Maibaum. The OHMSS script that Hunt was handed was the last one written during TB, before they switched it to YOLT, that included a reappearance of Goldfinger. Yes, I know Maibaum used this idea again for an unused DAF script, but it wasn't the first time it had surfaced, originally the producers wanted Goldfinger's twin brother in OHMSS. It was Peter Hunt that threw all that crap out and told Maibaum to go back to the original story and keep it grounded, not the producers.
I've never thought about it that way, really. He's at his best in both films, so it's a good point to draw similarities between the locations, and where Connery's at in his Bond tenure. Besides the strong summer feeling I get from the locations, there is also the somewhat close geographical proximity, which almost make TB like an extension of Bonds mission in Jamaica.
Actually, if you extend that double-bill to include Goldfinger, you have the Miami location as well, and get a "Bond-on-holliday"-treble!
He would only have made it OHMSS after YOLT if he wanted to - and therefore would have (hopefully) turned in a better performance. The stripped back OHMSS would have suited SC - and we may have got FRWL-quality performance.
I know little about the script evolution, but presumably the kilt costume was intended for SC, suggesting they were still hopeful of getting him back
Of course, we will never know - but I'm just saying it could have been glorious
So, Peter Hunt and Richard Maibaum were staying faithful to the book. If what you say was their true intention, then they would have simply dropped the kilt-wearing stuff from their movie as soon as Lazenby was cast and simply shot him in a Tux and no one would've been any the wiser.
Interesting about the ancestry work. I agree it would take time to research Fleming's own ancestry - but Bond's ancestry was fiction, so could be made up in a morning. I suppose it could be coincidence that Fleming stated Bond was Scottish around the same time he accepted SC as Bond, but may have been to head off contemporary questions as to why the quintessential English gentlemen spy had a Scottish accent?
It's probably selective memory syndrome, but Fleming said a lot of unkind things about Connery after watching him in Dr No, a lot of them involving four-letter expletives. FRWL movie didn't come out until 10 October 1963, which was when Fleming changed his mind about Connery and thought his performance great. OHMSS had already been published over 6 months prior, that's without factoring in the months of research, writing and getting the book to the publishing stage. And again, Bond isn't Scottish, his ancestry is both Scottish and Swiss. He is in fact defined as an Englishman in the novels. Bond only wore a kilt because he was impersonating Sir Hilary Bray at Piz Gloria, not as a homage to Connery.
I was going to interject this bit, as it seems to get lost at times. Some seem to be under the impression that Bond was using his own heritage to make the mask of Bray, when he's just playing the part by wearing the kilt. It was all part of the academic uniform, the ulster coat and professor-like tweed being a very obvious recall of academia, while the kilt was to show that Bray was so consumed in his work, he did studies on his own family line.
That's how I've always taken it, at least.
It is very cool to see Bond studying up on the heraldry items of crests to impress the ladies, that's true.
One of the things that is coolest about OHMSS is that Bond is actively playing a caricature of Bray, who signifies everything he isn't. While Bond in reality is cool under the collar, athletic, powerful, confident, mischievous, wild and all the rest, he plays Bray as a meek wimp with no real skills with women or social parlays. I always imagine that Bond is having a real out of his head moment at Piz Gloria, as he has to basically repress all the traits about him audiences loved him for having as an icon to adequately lose himself in the "character" of Bray and fool all there. At no other time does Bond ever disguise himself as someone who is so very clearly the antithesis of himself. Yet another way OHMSS was the first film to truly deconstruct Bond and flip the script, in addition to making his womanizing personality go the way of horses and carriages through the eyes of Tracy.
Agreed. Also, I bet that Lazenby will have been a little nervous.....and the fact that he doesn't show it makes him a good actor!
I always get tired of people saying that Lazenby was a poor actor. For the one film he did, I think he did great, juggling being Bond and Bond in disguise. On top of that, with the way he does his fighting scenes, I found his Bond to be more dangerous and unpredictable than any Bond - except for Craig, perhaps.
This is a very big difference to the way we see Bond in TB, with a very "in control" and cool Connery.
Interesting ,chaps...i might give that a go !
Gave TB 8 points (third place) in the BOND POLLS 2016: The Top 10 JAMES BOND-007 Film Ranking Contest , only behind FRWL (first) and OHMSS (second). Ranking these three is impossible for me, really, as they can change places between each viewing!
[/quote]Connery had been cast but Fleming wasn't happy with Connery in the role, especially when OHMSS was first published by 1 April 1963. Let's not also forget that Fleming only warmed to Connery after watching him in FRWL.[/quote]
Fleming must have quite liked Ursula Andress in DN though. He included her in OHMSS.
Somewhere between #4-6 for me, probably.
I totally agree on the Bahamas point. Although I'd argue that DN achieves this too. Your points on the tropics are one of the reasons DN is one of my favourite Fleming novels too......he transports you there!
DN is one of my favourite JB books, and as @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 points out, Fleming manages to transport the reader there.
I can't think of any two films in the series with the same actor that naturally give that same ambience (TSWLM/MR have similar plots but these wo remind me more of the move from TB to YOLT where there's more money up on the screen but one is too OTT).
Very much agreed that TB is DN on steroids. It's funny that TB was supposed to be the first Bond film, but EON were smart enough to see that the budget they had wouldn't be enough to get what they wanted. With the series built up by 64, they chose to really do TB justice the next time around.
As for other films that give off a similar feeling, I'd maybe elect GF-DAF, FRWL-TLD, and QoS-LTK.
Yes, without the same actor there are more similarities. I agree on FRWL/TLD only to a degree. I will add GE/TLD and OHMSS/FYEO to the mix (not just because of the alpine sequences but also the reset feel after the overblown predecessor).