The What if NTTD is the last EON produced Bond film? page 62

1252628303163

Comments

  • Posts: 1,917
    I can't think of any good evidence as to it having made any difference, but look forward to others' thoughts.
  • Posts: 2,918
    The producers had already spent a good deal of time in Britain before they made the Bond films, so one could arguably call them mid-Atlantic rather than American/Canadian.
  • edited March 2020 Posts: 440
    This hypothetical is too vague. There were many British movie producers at the time who each had varying levels of success and ideas about what they wanted from their films.

    People like Michael Balcon (Ealing Films) and Peter Rogers (Carry On Films) were typically only interested in making films aimed squarely at the British public and so accepted that theirs would likely have low budgets/international appeal.

    Others like Lew Grade and Pressburger&Powell were always trying to court the American market and so consequently often made very big budget lavish films in exotic locations with American stars (or at the very least, British actors who were already stars in America).

    :Edit: I don't think there's any such a thing as British sensibility or an American sensibility or what have you. Cultural trends and stereotypes absolutely exist but those are often subject to change all the time.

    I mean, before James Bond, was the image of the ultimate British man in Europe and the USA really a suave hyper-masculine alpha male, adept at lovemaking and an expert on fashion/food/wine etc?
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,818
    Two British producers: short term franchise.

    Two American producers: short term franchise.

    That Canadian producer and that American producer at that point in time: no end in sight.
    lightning_in_a_bottle.png?w=150&h=150&fit=fill&fm=png

  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    Two British producers: short term franchise.

    Two American producers: short term franchise.

    That Canadian producer and that American producer at that point in time: no end in sight.
    lightning_in_a_bottle.png?w=150&h=150&fit=fill&fm=png

    lol-- only coz Canucks arent appreciated as much on the international stage because of our cousin to the south (not taking away from their achievements, but the Canukal heads have many groundbreaking achievements and studies born from this land)....
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,436
    I found Tom Mankiewicz's comment about the producers wanting "an American who can write British" for DAF to be quite telling. To me EON was smart to realize that it needed to be written for the British audience while at the same time not eliminating the international audience. I always chuckle at some of the lines in DAF.

    Blofeld "Well go on it's merely a lift. Or elevator as you call them here." I may not have that direct quote.

    I also think if it's British producers we don't get Sean Connery cast as Bond. I don't think Cubby and Harry were looking for a typical English leading man and the result was getting Sean.
  • Posts: 2,918
    Richard Maibaum was already an American who could write British--I think what the producers wanted was someone with a more frivolous sense of humor.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,188
    One of the strangest and most specific sensibilities Mankiewicz delivered was write lines that sounded like it was by a British writer attempting to write American lingo.

    "You handle those cubes like a monkey handles coconuts!"
    thedove wrote: »
    I always chuckle at some of the lines in DAF.

    Blofeld "Well go on it's merely a lift. Or elevator as you call them here." I may not have that direct quote.

    It's "Well go on, it's merely a lift. Or perhaps I should say 'elevator'."

    Some of my favorite lines are from Mankiewicz, particularly DAF.

    "Well, if we destroy Kansas the world may not hear about it for years".

    A similar gag to that appears in SUPERMAN when the government is tracking the missile.

    "It's heading straight for Metropolis!"
    "Uh, actually sir, it appears to be heading for New Jersey."
    "New Jersey? What the hell is in New Jersey?"
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,436
    As always some good thoughts from a wide diverse group of agents.

    Lets jump back to the late eighties early nineties. LTK has been released in the tough ultra competitive summer of 1989. The Box Office suffers and Bond seems to have taken a misstep. However Cubby proceeds to move ahead with Bond 17 starring Dalton. The film is targeted for a 1991 release date and I believer even posters in Cannes shouted this out. A script or at least a screen treatment was crafted with the action taking place in China and involving robots and some sci-fi elements. However MGM gets broiled into legal and financial trouble and the script is eventually shelved. By the time it's all sorted out Dalton's contract is run out and a new Bond is brought on in Pierce Brosnan is brought in as a new Bond.

    However, what if MGM didn't have issues and EON was able to bring Bond 17 to the screen. Yes this one is for all the Dalton fans out there, what if Timothy Dalton starred in Bond 17 in 1991. Would this film been a success? Would Dalton then be set up for future films? How would this impact the casting of Craig many years later since his Bond has some similarities with Dalton's portrayal?

    What say you Mi6? What if Dalton had starred in a Bond film in 1991 Bond 17?
  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan Monsoon Palace, Udaipur
    Posts: 3,262
    thedove wrote: »
    However, what if MGM didn't have issues and EON was able to bring Bond 17 to the screen. Yes this one is for all the Dalton fans out there, what if Timothy Dalton starred in Bond 17 in 1991. Would this film been a success? Would Dalton then be set up for future films? How would this impact the casting of Craig many years later since his Bond has some similarities with Dalton's portrayal?

    What say you Mi6? What if Dalton had starred in a Bond film in 1991 Bond 17?

    Hopefully the 3rd time would've been the charm for Dalton as it had been for Moore. People forget that Moore's 2nd Bond film was a relative box disappointment after his 1st one had been a hit. Maybe a 1991 Bond 17 would've been Dalton's TSWLM?

    At the very least I wish EON/MGM would've waited until Christmas 1991 to release it and given it the promotion it needed to succeed.

  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,436
    Yes you do wonder about that. Connery had GF which some say is his definitive portrayal. Moore had TSWLM which many cite as him hitting stride with the character. Craig had SF which many say is his best work as Bond. Then we have Brosnan with TWINE. Oh I guess every theory had one that doesn't work ;)

    Bond movies traditionally were Christmas fare, but then I think Spy changed the release schedule and set them off as summer fare? I think a Christmas release works better.
  • Posts: 16,170
    I would have loved a 3rd Dalton in 1991. That's how it should have been, IMO.

    As a kid I loved the Bonds being released in the summer. No school, sunny skies, warm weather, perfect for Bond. T2 was probably the biggest release that summer, other than the Kevin Costner Robin Hood film. I doubt B17 would have repeated LTK's unfortunate US box office numbers.

    The treatment for B17 always fascinated me. Kept the Dalton grit, yet gave him a bit of fantasy to play with. Although some fans may dislike the robot angle, I don't think that treatment was any worse than some of the Purvis/Wade masterpieces that actually made it to the screen.

    At the time one of LTK's biggest criticisms was the lack of a larger than life cinematic Bond plot, being too serious in tone and too Miami Vice.
    I think this film would have addressed those issues and given Dalton a chance to have a little fun in the role.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,306
    Wasn't the Bond girl named Connie?
  • Posts: 16,170
    echo wrote: »
    Wasn't the Bond girl named Connie?

    Connie Webb.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    Sigh. What could've been...

    dRcjtOK.jpg

    Gdg28ZF.jpg

    @echo read all about the B17 that never was here:

    https://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/bond_17_intro.php3
  • Posts: 1,917
    Looking back at that year now, there's a lot to speculate on. When you think of summer, it's mostly the time of big-budget action movies and the summer of '91 was less so. It was dominated by Terminator 2, while Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves did good box office probably on Costner being the biggest star around at the time, but slammed by critics.

    Point Break, which is now considered a near classic, did okay, as did The Rocketeer, Backdraft and van Damme's Double Impact. None would be considered blockbusters, though. The Bruce Willis action comedy Hudson Hawk was a big bomb. But looking at the rest of the slate, a ton of the releases were comedies: Naked Gun 2, Hot Shots, City Slickers, and Thelma and Louise was a big drama.

    While Terminator was still a fresh new franchise at the time that had a lot of anticipation with groundbreaking special effects, Bond would've been the only other tentpole franchise that summer. It could've been the chance to rediscover it and the chance for Dalton to establish the character, although I don't subscribe to the third film theory. If done right, it could've revived the franchise or killed it off if audiences weren't receptive.

    As mentioned above, the Christmas season would've been even better. The only action picture was Willis's The Last Boy Scout, which wasn't a huge hit, and Star Trek VI was the big genre picture and was a hit.
    thedove wrote: »
    Bond movies traditionally were Christmas fare, but then I think Spy changed the release schedule and set them off as summer fare? I think a Christmas release works better.
    Looking at this from a wider perspective, it's an inconsistent release pattern. DN and FRWL were released in the October in the UK and in the spring in the U.S. GF was released on Sept. 17 in the UK and at Christmas in the U.S. TB was the first released in the UK and US at Christmas simultaneously.

    YOLT came out in summer '67. Now, 3 of the next 4 - OHMSS, DAF and TMWTGG - were Christmas releases, but LALD was a summer release. TSWLM was released in the same summer as Star Wars. Jaws was the first blockbuster that ushered in the summer being for big-budget popcorn entertainment two years before and the success of Star Wars solidified it and changed the industry as studios made this their focus. Christmas became more for awards season fare.

    I'm not sure what UA or Eon's thinking was in releasing TSWLM in the summer, but it could've been even bigger without that space movie everybody kept going back to see, but it stayed comfortably in that season for the next 5 films.

    Now since GE, we consider Bonds Christmas releases, but in a loose way. The only true Christmas release was TND, most of the others were released in October in the UK and then November in the U.S., but they were still on release during the holiday season. Most of these were released around the Thanksgiving season, which is a big holiday time here in the U.S.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,436
    @BT3366 the producers were capitalizing on 7-7-77. July 7th 1977 with 007.

    As for the Dalton adventure, I too would be curious to think about what might have been. It certainly had the fantastical elements that LTK lacked. I think Dalton might have been able to pulled it off.
  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan Monsoon Palace, Udaipur
    Posts: 3,262
    thedove wrote: »
    @BT3366 the producers were capitalizing on 7-7-77. July 7th 1977 with 007.

    In retrospect, it's too bad that EON didn't have the foresight to have had a Bond film released on July 7, 2007 aka 7-7-007. Definitely a missed opportunity.
    thedove wrote: »
    As for the Dalton adventure, I too would be curious to think about what might have been. It certainly had the fantastical elements that LTK lacked. I think Dalton might have been able to pulled it off.

    It definitely would've been fun to see Dalton have his GF/TSWLM style fantasy Bond adventure after the Cold War espionage-laden TLD(his era's FRWL) and the gritty LTK(which in some ways was the Lazenby DAF we never got).

  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    Was Lazenby's DAF going to be much different? :-?
  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan Monsoon Palace, Udaipur
    edited March 2020 Posts: 3,262
    JamesCraig wrote: »
    Was Lazenby's DAF going to be much different? :-?

    There is the belief that a Lazenby DAF would've been more of a true sequel to the events of OHMSS than the Connery DAF we got in reality. Just look at Della Leiter as a substitute for Tracy Bond(both brides murdered on their wedding day) and Franz Sanchez as a replacement for Savalas Blofeld and LTK becomes that "what if?" version of DAF.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    edited March 2020 Posts: 3,497
    JamesCraig wrote: »
    Was Lazenby's DAF going to be much different? :-?

    There is the belief that a Lazenby DAF would've been more of a true sequel to the events of OHMSS than the Connery DAF we got in reality. Just look at Della Leiter as a substitute for Tracy Bond(both brides murdered on their wedding day) and Franz Sanchez as a replacement for Savalas Blofeld.

    But... those are LTK plot points... :-?
  • Posts: 2,918
    JamesCraig wrote: »
    Was Lazenby's DAF going to be much different? :-?

    Maibaum's first treatments for the film suggests it would have been much different. Ultimately the producers decided to go in a different direction, especially when Connery returned.
  • OctopussyOctopussy Piz Gloria, Schilthorn, Switzerland.
    Posts: 1,081
    Dalton returning for Bond 17 would've been a dream come true. While I haven't personally read into much surrounding the narrative of Bond 17, I understand that it had some more fantastical elements in it. I feel Dalton would've pulled it off, he certainly did in The Living Daylights with the car chase which is probably the most fantasy element in the film. Dalton's gravitas would make you buy into the fantasy around him, IMO. Connery has proven this previously. I have always felt that it's the way Bond behaves or reacts within the environment he's put in that makes you buy into the fantasy, personally. Ultimately, I do believe the film would've been a success and it probably would've allowed Dalton to really establish himself in the role, although I do not prescribe to the third film theory.

    In relation to the future casting of Daniel Craig, I believe that we would've probably skipped the Brosnan era (Brosnan would've been too old for the role by the time Dalton finished) and then gone straight into Craig. It will be interesting to see who is cast next in the role of Bond, because typically we go from a darker Bond to a lighter one thereafter. If the next Bond is in the same vain as Connery, Lazenby, Dalton or Craig then I do believe it proves to some degree that they would've still cast Craig straight after Dalton, IMO.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    I would have loved a 3rd Dalton in 1991. That's how it should have been, IMO.

    As a kid I loved the Bonds being released in the summer. No school, sunny skies, warm weather, perfect for Bond. T2 was probably the biggest release that summer, other than the Kevin Costner Robin Hood film. I doubt B17 would have repeated LTK's unfortunate US box office numbers.

    The treatment for B17 always fascinated me. Kept the Dalton grit, yet gave him a bit of fantasy to play with. Although some fans may dislike the robot angle, I don't think that treatment was any worse than some of the Purvis/Wade masterpieces that actually made it to the screen.

    At the time one of LTK's biggest criticisms was the lack of a larger than life cinematic Bond plot, being too serious in tone and too Miami Vice.
    I think this film would have addressed those issues and given Dalton a chance to have a little fun in the role.

    An earlier draft for Bond 16 had a villain s plot that involved a plane crashing into Buckingham Palace, with Bond as an involuntary pilot.
  • edited March 2020 Posts: 11,425
    The B17 Dalton plot sounds quite intriguing to me. Also like the idea of an Asian set film.

    I'm also pretty sure that Dalton wasn't all that keen on the tone of LTK and wanted a more lighthearted film for his 3rd entry. People always seem to think Dalton was in some way behind the darker tone of LTK, but they were still very much producer led films back then (as opposed to actor producer led today with Craig) and I think Cubby was just going where I think he felt the market was at that time. Dalton didn't have much say in it, just getting the script a few weeks before shooting.

    It would be great to get an interview with Dalton and put all these questions to him. Like a really nerdy fan-led interview that goes into all the background stuff.
  • Would have loved at least 2 more Dalton films. But then it would have impacted on the Craig era which to me wouldbt have been worth the sacrifice.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Would have loved at least 2 more Dalton films. But then it would have impacted on the Craig era which to me wouldbt have been worth the sacrifice.

    Actually we could have had films in 91 and 93 and still had Brosnan and then Craig.

    The 6 year gap was just a lose lose situation for everyone.

    I suppose one scenario though might have been that Dalton established himself and either carried on to 95 or later. Had this happened and Dalton's more serious take on the character had become accepted then its harder to see Brosnan getting cast. But it makes Craig's casting even more likely.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited March 2020 Posts: 16,428
    When folks say 'would it have been a success?', well: it's a Bond film- they're all successes! So it would have done very well, as per usual. I realise LTK did less well than usual but it was far from a bomb; and a third Dalton would've been just the same.
    But: audiences didn't really take to Dalton all that much (they didn't hate him: it was more indifference really) so I don't think it would have suddenly lifted him off- and GoldenEye was still the way to relaunch the series.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,436
    Love the points raised here. The fact was TLD wasn't really written with any particular actor in mind. LTK was written for Dalton and played to his strengths. While I am not sure if Dalton wanted things darker, he definitely wanted to take it back to Fleming and that necessitated a change from Moore's era.

    I would hypothesize that if Dalton had a longer run we may not have gotten Craig as you would argue they play the character in a similar vein.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited March 2020 Posts: 16,428
    thedove wrote: »
    I would hypothesize that if Dalton had a longer run we may not have gotten Craig as you would argue they play the character in a similar vein.

    Which is true, they do. But then I don't know if they always have to be different to each other: I'd be surprised if Bond no.7 was a massive contrast to Craig's version- I feel like he's brought back the alpha male tough guy Bond and the audience will expect that.
    And I guess it depends on whether the third one we're talking about was his last or not: there's still plenty of Bros-room between him and Craig
    :)
Sign In or Register to comment.