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
Interesting thread thedove.
After reading “The Music of James Bond” by Jon Burlingame, its not clear that John Barry would have been able to score an “epic sized” FYEO in 1979. Because MR’s budget was so high ($30 million), EON was forced to co-produce it with a French firm (Les Productions Artistes Associes, p135). This meant that much of the post-production for MR was done outside of the UK – and that allowed Barry – who was a tax exile at the time - to resume work on Bond.
For the actual FYEO (in 1981), with its smaller budget, most of the post production work returned to the UK. Barry ultimately resolved his tax situation in 1983, in time to score OP.
On the current What if. I recall reading somewhere that Brosnan needed to keep some stubble even for when he was Bond (I believe in TND?). The makeup person said he looked young then too. So I have no doubt @Thunderfinger he would have needed to somehow look older in TLD to make it believable.
As much as I respect and like Brosnan I don't think we get LTK as the follow up to TLD. I also think the transition from Moore wouldn't have been as jarring for audiences. Brosnan has quite a bit of Moore's Bond in his portrayal.
Do we really think that if Brosnan was cast in TLD that Dalton doesn't get a chance to play Bond at all? That would mean Brosnan would do 6 total Bonds? Then right to Craig? Interesting.
Brosnan in TLD we would have got a skinnier Bond.
Joking aside Pierce would have done a fine Job, arguably Glen may have made Pierce into a better Bond than in the films we actually saw PB in.
I like what you say about Glen. Might it also be a Dick Maibaum script that would have aided in showcasing Brosnan to the world as double-o-7? I think as written Brosnan would have been able to pull off TLD. In fact I believe they weren't able to change much of the script as Dalton was brought on very last minute to replace him. Where I think it gets interesting to think about this scenario is what does the next Bond movie look like with Brosnan as the Bond? I can't see him doing well in LTK, that story and script were tailor made for Dalton. So would we get more of the fantastical elements and less revenge?
I'm trying to imagine Brosnan doing the exact same film (ie they didn't change it to 'cater for the actor') and I can't imagine him pulling off those tense scenes with the same tone or believability. His age may have had something to do with it.
Here is another photo uncertain if this was from the screen test though the first one is apparently.
Maibaum was one of the best writers IMO and I think TLD would have worked well with PB.
I hasten to add I would never want Dalton's films never to exist they are both great. This is purely me thinking PB would do well in a alternate reality.
I'd imagine LTK would not have happened. Although considering the Lethal Weapon & Die Hard series were towering over the action genre in 1989 I wouldn't discount that they may have been tempted to go down the Sanchez drug dealer route anyway - just not as violently and maybe without the revenge angle.
But most likely I'd except they would have got into the GE/TND mode a little earlier. It would have been curious to see if Brosnan started in 87 that by the time they got to TND in 97 or TWINE in 1999 if they decided to realign the series - in the way they did with FYEO in Moore's tenure.
If Brosnan had starred in TLD we probably would have never gotten a GE either.
Not that he didn't have any fans. They were out there, but few and far between, at least in my personal experience. The critics liked him though. Most notably, Siskel and Ebert gave him high praise.
It seemed like, for the casual American moviegoer at the time, those who liked Moore wanted the series to continue in that fashion. Conversely, those who didn't like Moore wanted a return to someone like Connery. Dalton was the Bond no one expected. Brosnan was the safe choice to try to appease the masses.
Those are my memories of it anyway. I was quite young at the time (around 9 when TLD came out) but I can remember family and friends talking about it quite a bit.
What was the actual date MTM rescinded their cancellation of REMINGTON STEELE, thus screwing Pierce over?
I vividly recall still being in school and Entertainment Tonight making a premature announcement that the Brosnan deal fell thru. They added that 32 year old Australian model Finlay Light would be starring as Bond in THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS.
Host John Tesh quipped that the new Bond sounded like a beer commercial: Finlay Light.
This must have been in early June of '86 as I recall.
As much as I love Tim and the film itself, I do think TLD would have been a bigger hit in the States had Pierce starred. Everyone I knew wanted him for the part.
Everyone I knew voiced regret and dare I say a bit of disdain when he lost out and Tim got the role. Of course there was a huge vibe of curiosity regarding Tim and the film, but in the long run, just about everyone I spoke with seemed to feel the film was a missed opportunity.
In addition, aside from opening weekend, the theater I saw it in 7 times was pretty bare.
In an interview John Glen mentioned he thought the film itself would have pretty much been the same. No drastic changes were made upon Dalton's casting. I believe Tim had the wardrobe reduced by about 25% so Brosnan's Bond probably would have had a more variety of outfits during the course of the film. I doubt the film would have benefited from Tim's intensity, though, Pierce is much lighter.
I think afterwards, Cubby may have continued adapting the short stories with Pierce in the lead. We might have had THE PROPERTY OF A LADY as B16. Had that been a hit, who knows? Perhaps Cubby would have transitioned from Fleming to Gardner and the early '90's been graced with adaptations of LICENCE RENEWED. ICEBREAKER, and WIN LOSE OR DIE? The hiatus occurred because the then head of MGM began licensing Bond without Cubby's approval (in a nutshell, if I have that right). That still may of happened regardless, but less likely had the 16th film been a massive hit. Cubby liked to keep Bond going at regular intervals. If he were still with us, even at 110 I believe he'd be committed to keeping Bond on the screen.
Dalton was cast last minute and then to further add to the challenges he was still working on Brenda Starr. I believe he ended up finishing on Brenda Starr and then the very next day he was reporting to TLD.
Therefore the script wasn't tailored for any particular actor. Dalton was making suggestions through out filming based on his reading the Fleming novels and wanting to make it more grounded. Therefore things like the flying carpet went out.
AIDS was a big societal issue at the time so no matter who played Bond it was always a one girl Bond movie. I really can see Pierce pulling off TLD. I think it was well suited to his strengths. The American Box Office would have been bigger with Brosnan in the role for sure.
I don't see LTK being made at all. That movie was totally playing to Dalton's strengths as Bond. I would envision more of the Bond 17 screen treatment that has surfaced as being the follow up to TLD.
Thank God for contracts!!
Back as far as 1983, US Magazine did a poll on who should be the next Bond as Bond fever was high from OP and NSNA and Moore was again being rumored to leave and Brosnan overwhelmingly won. TLD would likely have been even bigger here with him in the role as there was a built-in audience, which I think was such a factor when GE was released. People were ready to accept him and Dalton was unknown, the opposite of Moore and I think that was a factor. I only knew him as Prince Barin, but was thrilled with the choice and he exceeded my expectations.
I had two friends who were underwhelmed when TLD was released, one was a huge Brosnan fan, so naturally he would have a built-in bias against Dalton and the other just didn't think the spirit was the same as before.
I would've liked to have Dalton for more Bond, but I guess it happened as it was intended.
I have to agree with your friend here,i felt the same when I left the cinema...I was 17 at the time.
Good point about the sniper scenes. I would hazard a guess that has filming went on the script and dialogue was being tailored and changed to fit Dalton. Obviously the story was set in stone and locations and such all chosen. But they would have been able to sculpt the script for Dalton.
Good thoughts on this what if scenario.
No wonder it looks confused at times.
I've read multiple areas in which contrary to belief, it was never written with Moore in mind.
Eeeeek I didn't know that...yes indeed,bless you for that Cubby !!
I had forgotten just how young Brosnan was in 1986. Which surprises me. He really did look too young to play the part.
He was very skinny/wiry as well,he needed to physically mature.
I think it all worked out well for him,he was needed in 1995 to rescue the series !