Did 9/11 influence the direction of DAD and the demise of Brosnan's time as Bond ?

CraigMooreOHMSS

bondjames wrote: »

CraigMooreOHMSS wrote: »

bondjames wrote: »

CraigMooreOHMSS wrote: »

barryt007 wrote: »

True ,but to touch on that subject only a year later ,in more depth,i think would have been wrong...everyone was still raw ..

Absolutely. I'm not saying the plot should have had any ties to 9/11 or any other event current at the time as it automatically puts a timestamp on the film which never does well for its longevity. Just look at TLD with the Mujahaddin.

They definitely could have anticipated the mood of the 00's in the aftermath of the attacks, though. The franchise used to be ahead of the game in these types of things.

They did. It just took them 5 years and a necessary actor change to get the product out. They even referenced 9/11 in CR.

Of course. 5 years later is not "ahead of the game" though.

True, but I think they may have already been on their way with DAD pre-production shortly after 9/11.

To stop and reassess the whole thing with a new premise and tone probably was difficult. Also, it was a 40th anniversary film, and they perhaps decided to go for the 'homage' lighter tone, which they may have felt fit Brosnan better.

The long gap was on account of MGM's troubles. Otherwise, the tonal shift may have appeared earlier (they had CR's rights by 1999).

That is also true but many films, in fact a huge amount, get readjusted due to outside circumstances during pre-production. I think they simply misjudged what general audiences were looking for at the time - and the fans even more so, obviously. But the latter arguably was beginning to creep in before DAD came out.

True on your last, too. But even disregarding that, the tonal shift shouldn't ever have to be that drastic.

QuantumOrganization

Blame George Bush for DAD