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
Which would have made more sense in a way, what with her being Canadian (it's odd how no-one ever mentions Moneypenny's accent! :D ). I'm glad it worked out the way it did, although I do really like Eunice Gayson: she's nicely sassy.
Tiffany does make sense, yeah. I could have handled that.
Camille would work in a return, yeah. Just for them to see where each other has ended up.
Ah cool, I can well imagine that in a series of 60s films, yes. Interesting nugget, thanks.
That's what I wanted to say regarding Sylvia Trench @mtm. She's meant to be a woman for casual sex between missions and she seems to consider Bond merely as a lover, not husband material. I can't see her as the wife of Carver. She's one of the least plausible Bond girl for TND, except Paris herself.
Yeah she is fairly insistent that he gives her a seeing-to in Dr No, despite only having met him seconds before! :D
It's funny, she's actually almost the dominant one in the relationship to some extent: she's kind of like the female James Bond, much moreso than most of the girls Connery's Bond encountered. If they had developed it as PrinceKamal suggested, I think it would have been plausible that they could have married after a few films as they do seem on the same level and have an understanding. Maybe not falling in love exactly, but just being the same.
She's one of the few Bond girls who actively go after him rather than be seduced by him. She was quite predatory in DN, come to think of it.
It's too bad they haven't played with this aspect in future films. It does do a nice job to bring continuity and also you can explore some aspects of the character. In DN she shows us how Bond likes the ladies. In FRWL it foreshadows Bond letting his libido being his undoing as we know SPECTRE is using a female to lure him.
DN was surely part of the sexual revolution.
And it's her whole angle in the casino scene in Dr No too: she's very much out to get him.
Yes. The film depicted a woman who knew what she wanted sexually, and she acted purposefully to get it. And the film makes no moral comment on that. DN must have been thrilling to audiences brought up on fifties films, a real breath of fresh air
It must have shocked many as well. Come to think of it, Sylvia Trench is one of the best defined and most interesting "minor" Bond girls. Had they used her more than they did, the character would have suffered. I can only dread the massacre Tom Mackiewicz would have made of her in DAF.
Yes even the ending of the film. Even though it's Bond untying the rope, he only does it cause Honey motions for him to come down off the seat.
+2
+3
Lets transport back to 1968 and find ourselves with the casting of a new James Bond! 100's of actors were considered and a few were screen tested. Famously Life Magazine had pictures of the screen tests. As we know EON chose Lazenby but what if they had made a choice from one of the others? Would this had been a one and done actor too? Or do you think a different actor would have signed up for the 7 year contract that Lazenby famously rejected.
A multiple choice what if! You can talk about a general what if and tell us what you think might have been the result is some other actor had been cast. Or you can zero in on one of those who got snapped by Life Magazine. (they were obviously front runners)
The list of actors is John Richardson, Anthony Rogers, Robert Campbell, or Hans De Vries. An article on Mi6 can be found here if you wish to see each candidate
https://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/history_ohmss_auditions.php3
So say you Mi6? What if another actor had been cast in OHMSS? What impact on that film but also the future of the series?
If the actor was announced before the release to star in several other installments, this could have created a more encouraging dynamic. This leads to the same status if Lazenby continued for more movies: I think he could have been accepted by the audiences, but never as much as Moore was ultimately.
Even if it is only pure supposition, I assume that after three or four additional films, the series could have needed a new youth and that in any case, no unknown actor would have been fully accepted in this context. Moore was able to breathe a new life that none of these actors would ever have been able to give.
However, among these contenders, Lazenby clearly seemed to me the best one. Robert Campbell has an interesting physique, and makes me think of Henry Cavill in Man from UNCLE, but his American nationality would have been a big handicap for the role. John Richardson would certainly have brought something different and would have been suitable for the romantic part, but not so much for the action part. Physically, at least, Lazenby was the most appropriate for the role.
Still he might have been interesting. I do like the other contender's looks as well. Robert Campbell and Anthony Rogers look alright to me. Anthony Rogers reminds me a bit of Terence Cooper in CR '67.
I actually think all five contenders look more Bondian than, dare I say, ANY of the names mentioned in the media as Craig replacements.
The fight scenes would have been worse, but I can't help thinking on the whole Roger would really have improved OHMSS. It needed a star playing Bond and it didn't get that. It might well have steered his subsequent films in a different direction too, for better or worse.
Regarding the question asked, I suppose that he and the others would have agreed to sign a multi-picture, maybe not as much as was proposed to Lazenby, and would have continuity for some additional films.
I don't think that's necessarily true, it just needed to be someone good.
I think there's also an argument that OHMSS was perhaps not the best film to make with a new Bond though: staying a bit more trad might have been better. But then LALD worked and that's fairly out there.
I'm with you on Sir Roger.
But assuming that this actor (Campbell, de Vries or even Lazenby) played the role until maybe 1974, before being replaced, would Eon have turned to Moore at that time? To the extent that he would have almost already turned fifty, perhaps he would no longer have been their favorite. It wouldn't seem impossible to me, but maybe not the most likely thing. Anyway, it would have required an actor recognized and appreciated by the audience, as opposed to the unknown who would just conclude his term.
Also, off topic, I wanted to return to an older question from this thread:
According to Some Kind of Hero, what became of Moonraker was originally planned for FYEO. A treatment written by Tom Mankiewicz from May 1978, involved a space shuttle taskforce, known as the Enterprise fleet, and a bow-and-arrow wielding heroine called the Archer. And it was titled "For Your Eyes Only". The plan has therefore always been to propose a big scale adventure. It is interesting to think that if the Moonraker titled remained unused for the rest of the Moore era, the novel could have have been adapted during Dalton's tenure.
Tamahori was clearly insane. Probably one of the worst ideas I’ve ever heard from a Director.
+1.