The What if Bond is modernized from a straight white male in the next film adventure?

1424345474868

Comments

  • Posts: 15,229
    Dalton cast as Bond in OHMSS would not have hurt the movie, but it would have hurt Dalton's tenure. I think he would have made only one Bond. Any successor of Connery was doomed to fail at the time. Except maybe Moore, and that's a big maybe. I think Moore without Lazenby would not have been as successful as Bond.
  • Ludovico wrote: »
    I think Moore without Lazenby would not have been as successful as Bond.
    Probably less successful, but I think Moore could have directly succeeded Connery in '68/'69. He probably would have been the only successor who wasn't doomed to fail at the time.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,602
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I think Moore without Lazenby would not have been as successful as Bond.
    Probably less successful, but I think Moore could have directly succeeded Connery in '68/'69. He probably would have been the only successor who wasn't doomed to fail at the time.

    Was Moore considered in 1968/69 or was he committed to The Saint and couldn't do it?
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited November 2022 Posts: 3,800
    [DELETED]
  • Was Moore considered in 1968/69 or was he committed to The Saint and couldn't do it?
    He was! Apparently, Broccoli and Saltzman considered an adaptation of The Man with the Golden with Moore in '67 with Cambodia thought as a location; but indeed his commitment to The Saint prohibited him from considering the possibility.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited November 2022 Posts: 3,800
    Was Moore considered in 1968/69 or was he committed to The Saint and couldn't do it?
    He was! Apparently, Broccoli and Saltzman considered an adaptation of The Man with the Golden with Moore in '67 with Cambodia thought as a location; but indeed his commitment to The Saint prohibited him from considering the possibility.

    Actually, it's in 1969, after Connery left the role, they considered doing TMWTGG and planning to hire Moore as Bond, yes The Saint did kept him from playing Bond at the time, but not just that, there's also a Civil War happening in Cambodia at the time, so that also prevented the plan to film TMWTGG.

    Peter Hunt was appointed as the director for the next film, and like what they did with Roald Dahl, they've asked Hunt on what Bond novel would he liked to adapt, and Hunt picked OHMSS because he liked the story, and the rest is history.
  • edited November 2022 Posts: 910
    MI6HQ wrote: »
    Actually, it's in 1969, after Connery left the role, they considered doing TMWTGG and planning to hire Moore as Bond, yes The Saint did kept him from playing Bond at the time.
    It was before 1969: not only because the Khmer Rouge launched their first offensive in January 1968, with before that the Samlaut Uprising in April 1967, but also because principal photography for OHMSS began in October 1968. All the more since LIFE Magazine published an article in 1967 about the auditions for OHMSS (https://www.life.com/arts-entertainment/being-007-life-behind-the-scenes-at-james-bond-auditions/).
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,694
    MI6HQ wrote: »
    Was Moore considered in 1968/69 or was he committed to The Saint and couldn't do it?
    He was! Apparently, Broccoli and Saltzman considered an adaptation of The Man with the Golden with Moore in '67 with Cambodia thought as a location; but indeed his commitment to The Saint prohibited him from considering the possibility.

    Actually, it's in 1969, after Connery left the role, they considered doing TMWTGG and planning to hire Moore as Bond, yes The Saint did kept him from playing Bond at the time, but not just that, there's also a Civil War happening in Cambodia at the time, so that also prevented the plan to film TMWTGG.

    Peter Hunt was appointed as the director for the next film, and like what they did with Roald Dahl, they've asked Hunt on what Bond novel would he liked to adapt, and Hunt picked OHMSS because he liked the story, and the rest is history.

    How do you know that Roald Dahl personally chose to adapt YOLT? I thought it was because of Bond’s unexpected popularity with Japan audiences. Dahl said it was Fleming’s worst book. There were better books for him to adapt.
  • MaxCasino wrote: »
    How do you know that Roald Dahl personally chose to adapt YOLT?
    Well he didn't since both Sydney Boehm and Harold Jack Bloom wrote treatments before Dahl was hired, the former in 1965 according to The James Bond Archives.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,480
    Yes this section of Bond history is rather fascinating. At one-point OHMSS was going to go after GF. I believe some prints showed this in the end credits, but don't quote me on that. LOL! Then McClory comes knocking and asks if they can co-produce TB. EON is more than happy since they didn't have the rights to the book. They decide to do OHMSS after TB. But then notice many similarities with the plots and decide to not do that book. As some have pointed out, Japan is having full Bondmania and so it is decided to do that film next.

    Great stuff and lots of fodder for what-if scenarios!
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited December 2022 Posts: 7,593
    I wonder if it would be at all cool if there was a Bond "What If...?" type show in the same vein as the Marvel one, animated and all that.

    Maybe it would be pointless to see a Dalton OHMSS, or a Brosnan CR, if it were animated and not live action. Still could be cool.
  • TheSkyfallen06TheSkyfallen06 Buenos Aires, Argentina.
    Posts: 1,127
    I wonder if it would be at all cool if there was a Bond "What If...?" type show in the same vein as the Marvel one, animated and all that.

    Maybe it would be pointless to see a Dalton OHMSS, or a Brosnan CR, if it were animated and not live action. Still could be cool.

    What if Irma Bunt didn't kill Tracy?

    What if Bond rescued Vesper in time?

    What if Bond joined Trevelyan on his plan?
  • thedove wrote: »
    They decide to do OHMSS after TB. But then notice many similarities with the plots and decide to not do that book.
    I thought it was because of weather conditions, and that a warm Swiss winter and inadequate snow cover led to Broccoli and Saltzman to postpone OHMSS.

    Actually that's a pretty easy what if: what if '65 winter had been colder in Switzerland? With better skiing conditions, Eon would have then probably sticked with this novel rather than YOLT. Gilbert was seemingly already hired to direct the movie, no matter the novel chosen. Released at the height of Bondmania, the movie probably would have focused more on gadgets, something already reflected by Maibaum's draft from the time that included an amphibious Aston Martin that allows Bond to save Tracy from drowning. Ultimately, I think it would have been Connery's last no matter what, but, by not going to Japan, the experience would still have been more pleasant for him.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    Posts: 3,800
    thedove wrote: »
    They decide to do OHMSS after TB. But then notice many similarities with the plots and decide to not do that book.
    I thought it was because of weather conditions, and that a warm Swiss winter and inadequate snow cover led to Broccoli and Saltzman to postpone OHMSS.

    Actually that's a pretty easy what if: what if '65 winter had been colder in Switzerland? With better skiing conditions, Eon would have then probably sticked with this novel rather than YOLT. Gilbert was seemingly already hired to direct the movie, no matter the novel chosen. Released at the height of Bondmania, the movie probably would have focused more on gadgets, something already reflected by Maibaum's draft from the time that included an amphibious Aston Martin that allows Bond to save Tracy from drowning. Ultimately, I think it would have been Connery's last no matter what, but, by not going to Japan, the experience would still have been more pleasant for him.

    So a wet Nellie before a wet nellie? I wonder how would that work though 😅
  • MI6HQ wrote: »
    So a wet Nellie before a wet nellie? I wonder how would that work though 😅

    Here how it is described in Matthew Field's Some Kind of Hero:
    Had Sean Connery been held to his contract OHMSS could have been very different as ideas and casting suggestions from those screenplays suggest. At one point, Blofeld would have been revealed to be Goldfinger’s twin brother, with Gert Fröbe in line to play the part. A later casting suggestion for Blofeld was Max von Sydow. Bond would have rescued Tracy in an Aston Martin capable of driving underwater complete with harpoon device. Alternatively, Bond was to have been equipped with the new Ford Grand Tursimo Mk III. All the screenplays pre-1968 are gadget-laden affairs with 007 being fitted out with blowpipe skipoles, skistrap grenades and a 3D television. Bond was to have despatched the villains causing statues to fall on them. Instead of Bond being imprisoned by Blofeld in the cable car wheelhouse, 007 is originally trapped in a chimpanzee cage.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited December 2022 Posts: 3,800
    Had Sean Connery been held to his contract OHMSS could have been very different as ideas and casting suggestions from those screenplays suggest. At one point, Blofeld would have been revealed to be Goldfinger’s twin brother, with Gert Fröbe in line to play the part. A later casting suggestion for Blofeld was Max von Sydow. Bond would have rescued Tracy in an Aston Martin capable of driving underwater complete with harpoon device. Alternatively, Bond was to have been equipped with the new Ford Grand Tursimo Mk III. All the screenplays pre-1968 are gadget-laden affairs with 007 being fitted out with blowpipe skipoles, skistrap grenades and a 3D television. Bond was to have despatched the villains causing statues to fall on them. Instead of Bond being imprisoned by Blofeld in the cable car wheelhouse, 007 is originally trapped in a chimpanzee cage.

    No way! This could or even would! have been more worse!

    Thankfully this didn't happen.
  • MI6HQ wrote: »
    No way! This could or even would! have been more worse!

    Thankfully this didn't happen.

    I doubt however that all of these ideas would have been kept. The Goldfinger's brother was for example rejected twice (most notably during DAF pre-production when Maibaun went as far as writing a treatment with this idea). But it reflects the spirit of that time and how OHMSS would have been approached for a 1967 release date, with Gilbert as the director (even though he didn't seem to have been involved with these scripts). I also guess Diana Rigg wouldn't have been chosen for the part of Tracy, since her casting was made to balance Lazenby's inexperience. With Connery in the role, I guess they would have went for a unknown actress. Someone like Karin Dor (Helga Brandt in YOLT, who also appeared in Hitchcock's Topaz).
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited December 2022 Posts: 6,385
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    MI6HQ wrote: »
    Was Moore considered in 1968/69 or was he committed to The Saint and couldn't do it?
    He was! Apparently, Broccoli and Saltzman considered an adaptation of The Man with the Golden with Moore in '67 with Cambodia thought as a location; but indeed his commitment to The Saint prohibited him from considering the possibility.

    Actually, it's in 1969, after Connery left the role, they considered doing TMWTGG and planning to hire Moore as Bond, yes The Saint did kept him from playing Bond at the time, but not just that, there's also a Civil War happening in Cambodia at the time, so that also prevented the plan to film TMWTGG.

    Peter Hunt was appointed as the director for the next film, and like what they did with Roald Dahl, they've asked Hunt on what Bond novel would he liked to adapt, and Hunt picked OHMSS because he liked the story, and the rest is history.

    How do you know that Roald Dahl personally chose to adapt YOLT? I thought it was because of Bond’s unexpected popularity with Japan audiences. Dahl said it was Fleming’s worst book. There were better books for him to adapt.

    Apparently Eon didn't want to do OHMSS right after TB because it was too similar: "Thunderball on skis." Whatever that means.

    Anyway, Hunt was a genius for choosing OHMSS because (1) it's arguably the best and most filmic novel and (2) downbeat endings were in vogue in the late '60s, so he was able to do a true adaptation.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited December 2022 Posts: 3,800
    MI6HQ wrote: »
    No way! This could or even would! have been more worse!

    Thankfully this didn't happen.

    I doubt however that all of these ideas would have been kept. The Goldfinger's brother was for example rejected twice (most notably during DAF pre-production when Maibaun went as far as writing a treatment with this idea). But it reflects the spirit of that time and how OHMSS would have been approached for a 1967 release date, with Gilbert as the director (even though he didn't seem to have been involved with these scripts). I also guess Diana Rigg wouldn't have been chosen for the part of Tracy, since her casting was made to balance Lazenby's inexperience. With Connery in the role, I guess they would have went for a unknown actress. Someone like Karin Dor (Helga Brandt in YOLT, who also appeared in Hitchcock's Topaz).

    True, and I wouldn't like that to happen, Diana Rigg is perfect in the role, leave that alone.

    Brigitte Bardot??? :)) No way! She and Connery had no chemistry, and she also lacked some acting skills.

    So, nah! I wouldn't and couldn't trade Diana Rigg, she's a perfection!
  • Posts: 15,229
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I think Moore without Lazenby would not have been as successful as Bond.
    Probably less successful, but I think Moore could have directly succeeded Connery in '68/'69. He probably would have been the only successor who wasn't doomed to fail at the time.

    Probably. I daresay he would have made a great OHMSS, which could have made his whole tenure a dash darker.
  • I think seeing Moore and Rigg bounce off each others abilities would’ve been great to see.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited December 2022 Posts: 3,800
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I think Moore without Lazenby would not have been as successful as Bond.
    Probably less successful, but I think Moore could have directly succeeded Connery in '68/'69. He probably would have been the only successor who wasn't doomed to fail at the time.

    Probably. I daresay he would have made a great OHMSS, which could have made his whole tenure a dash darker.

    Agreed with Moore, though my only doubt was the physicality part where he seemed not good of.
    I would *leave* it as it is.

    Now let's turn to the other side of the bottle, how do you guys think Brosnan would have fared in Casino Royale?
  • MI6HQ wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I think Moore without Lazenby would not have been as successful as Bond.
    Probably less successful, but I think Moore could have directly succeeded Connery in '68/'69. He probably would have been the only successor who wasn't doomed to fail at the time.

    Probably. I daresay he would have made a great OHMSS, which could have made his whole tenure a dash darker.

    Agreed with Moore, though my only doubt was the physicality part where he seemed not good of.
    I would let it as it is.

    Now let's turn to the other side of the bottle, how do you guys think Brosnan would have fared in Casino Royale?

    Personally I think Pierce could’ve pulled off Casino Royale, and he would’ve done it splendidly, but I wouldn’t trade Craig’s version for the world, and I say that as a Brosnan fanboy.
  • Posts: 4,300
    MI6HQ wrote: »
    So a wet Nellie before a wet nellie? I wonder how would that work though 😅

    Here how it is described in Matthew Field's Some Kind of Hero:
    Had Sean Connery been held to his contract OHMSS could have been very different as ideas and casting suggestions from those screenplays suggest. At one point, Blofeld would have been revealed to be Goldfinger’s twin brother, with Gert Fröbe in line to play the part. A later casting suggestion for Blofeld was Max von Sydow. Bond would have rescued Tracy in an Aston Martin capable of driving underwater complete with harpoon device. Alternatively, Bond was to have been equipped with the new Ford Grand Tursimo Mk III. All the screenplays pre-1968 are gadget-laden affairs with 007 being fitted out with blowpipe skipoles, skistrap grenades and a 3D television. Bond was to have despatched the villains causing statues to fall on them. Instead of Bond being imprisoned by Blofeld in the cable car wheelhouse, 007 is originally trapped in a chimpanzee cage.

    Someone really wanted to use that Goldfinger's brother idea, didn't they? Anyway, most of that sounds absolutely stupid. I do like the idea of von Sydow playing Blofeld though.

    It's interesting that most of us tend to speculate what a version of OHMSS with Connery would have looked like, or indeed what would have happened if it had been made earlier. I wonder, however, what OHMSS would have looked like if it had been made later, say in the 70s? The novel of course centres around a slightly older, more jaded Bond so it makes sense. DAF and subsequent films are in themselves a reaction to OHMSS, so I dunno how the series would have progressed without OHMSS.
  • edited December 2022 Posts: 910
    MI6HQ wrote: »
    Now let's turn to the other side of the bottle, how do you guys think Brosnan would have fared in Casino Royale?
    To be honest I would have loved to see Brosnan in Casino Royale and, supposing it had the right script, I think the movie could have been great. After DAD, the series would have, no matter what, returned to something more down to earth and, even with Brosnan, I don't think we would have had something bombastic leaning towards sci-fi.

    While it makes sense for the actual movie to go back to Bond's beginnings, I think the whole plot could have still be relevant with a seasoned agent who over time has closed in on himself and thinks he has become invulnerable from the feelings point of view... But who falls in love on an apparently basic mission. At the same time, because he is seasoned and aging, he would think all the more of leaving everything to live with Vesper, thinking that he must leave his job while he can or he will die alone. All in all it could have been a great send-off for Brosnan.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited December 2022 Posts: 3,800
    True, I think Brosnan could've pulled off that one too.
    I mean, Brosnan had never been gave a chance to show his meaty acting (If I called that correctly).
    I think Brosnan could have done something more in his Bond role, there's something inside of it (think of TWINE), but the Producers never gave him a chance, he's butchered with scripts that was made because of the trends.
    MI6HQ wrote: »
    Now let's turn to the other side of the bottle, how do you guys think Brosnan would have fared in Casino Royale?
    To be honest I would have loved to see Brosnan in Casino Royale and, supposing it had the right script, I think the movie could have been great. After DAD, the series would have, no matter what, returned to something more down to earth and, even with Brosnan, I don't think we would have had something bombastic leaning towards sci-fi.

    While it makes sense for the actual movie to go back to Bond's beginnings, I think the whole plot could have still be relevant with a seasoned agent who over time has closed in on himself and thinks he has become invulnerable from the feelings point of view... But who falls in love on an apparent basic mission. At the same time, because he is seasoned and aging, he would think all the more of leaving everything to live with Vesper, thinking that he must leave his job while he can or he will die alone. All in all it could have been a great send-off for Brosnan.

    I agree! I couldn't said it better.
  • MI6HQ wrote: »
    Now let's turn to the other side of the bottle, how do you guys think Brosnan would have fared in Casino Royale?
    To be honest I would have loved to see Brosnan in Casino Royale and, supposing it had the right script, I think the movie could have been great. After DAD, the series would have, no matter what, returned to something more down to earth and, even with Brosnan, I don't think we would have had something bombastic leaning towards sci-fi.

    While it makes sense for the actual movie to go back to Bond's beginnings, I think the whole plot could have still be relevant with a seasoned agent who over time has closed in on himself and thinks he has become invulnerable from the feelings point of view... But who falls in love on an apparently basic mission. At the same time, because he is seasoned and aging, he would think all the more of leaving everything to live with Vesper, thinking that he must leave his job while he can or he will die alone. All in all it could have been a great send-off for Brosnan.

    Well put!
  • While it's easy to imagine Brosnan in Casino Royale, I'm pretty sure it would have been his send-off, which raises questions about what the next era would have been like. Supposing CR would have been released in 2004/2005, Bond 22 would have came out around 2007/2008. Craig was already on Barbara Broccoli's radar, so I guess he would have been chosen no matter what. But without CR, his tenure would have been radically different... Would Bond 22 have still been an origin story?
  • TheSkyfallen06TheSkyfallen06 Buenos Aires, Argentina.
    Posts: 1,127
    While it's easy to imagine Brosnan in Casino Royale, I'm pretty sure it would have been his send-off, which raises questions about what the next era would have been like. Supposing CR would have been released in 2004/2005, Bond 22 would have came out around 2007/2008. Craig was already on Barbara Broccoli's radar, so I guess he would have been chosen no matter what. But without CR, his tenure would have been radically different... Would Bond 22 have still been an origin story?

    I don't think so, but what i know is that it wouldn't be called "Quantum Of Solace".
  • edited December 2022 Posts: 910
    I don't think it has been discussed it: originally Richard Maibaum and Michael G. Wilson proposed The Living Daylights to be a prequel in the series and wrote several treatments based on this idea. About it, Maibaum said:
    There was a lot of stuff in that we regretted losing – the whole business about James Bond as a young naval officer, a wild one that couldn’t be disciplined, who was reminded by his grandfather that the family motto is The World Is Not Enough. Through a friend of the grandfather, he gets a chance to redeem himself.

    These treatments have been described in both Charles Helfenstein's Making of The Living Daylights and Mark Edlitz's The Lost Adventures of James Bond. Set in Southeast Asia during the 1970s, they involved Bond being mentored by a senior 00-agent named Burton Trevor with whom he is tasked to infiltrate a Golden Triangle warlord's inner circles in order to kill him. So, what if Bond 15 was a prequel?
Sign In or Register to comment.