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

Agent_One

thedove wrote: »

Very insightful @mattjoes no need to apologize about going out of order. I think you bring up some great points. We can only wish Barry had been lured to the project. But I think your conclusion is correct, he was loyal to EON

I would never take a Barry score for the mess that is NSNA if it meant none of his 80s work for the official series.

bigladiesman

thedove wrote: »

Very insightful @mattjoes no need to apologize about going out of order. I think you bring up some great points. We can only wish Barry had been lured to the project. But I think your conclusion is correct, he was loyal to EON

NSNA would have benefited greatly from names like Lalo Schifrin or Jerry Goldsmith. And if they wanted to go whismical, well, I think Mike Post or even Giorgio Moroder would have done a better job than Legrand.

mtm

thedove wrote: »

Thanks for contributing @Herr_Stockmann I agree that it is interesting to think of what if. Roger was available in 1968 but not in 1969. The writers of the book suggest that's why the producers didn't go with him in OHMSS. The window would have only worked if they had the film ready to go for a 1968 release.

I'm curious why EON always seemed to think TMWTGG only worked in an Asian setting. First thinking of Cambodia and then setting the film in Hong Kong and Thailand.

I think Moore directly after Connery might have had a better chance for success. We know that Moore was fine with doing the role and wouldn't have pulled a George. We know audiences on both sides of the pond knew him. But if they did TMWTGG in 1968, when would they do OHMSS?

It is interesting to ponder!

It's a good thought. TMWTGG actually cones close to being quite good at the beginning, it has an interesting opening. But then it all falls apart rapidly and the Solex stuff is all so strange. Why is Bond going after a macguffin in this film? If your film is about the world's best assassin, then have Bond trying to stop an assassination! Scaramanga should be going after the M or the Russian President or something. Imagine an ending like Octopussy with Bond desperately racing against time, then once he's foiled the plan he follows Scaramanga somewhere and they have their duel.
Of course doing it in 1968 is no reason to think they'd do it any better but you never know. I'd almost like them to try it again as there's a good idea in there.

thedove wrote: »

We know that TMWTGG would be less taxing as an acting vehicle and might provide the new Bond with enough good material to work with. Maybe they would have done OHMSS next. I know many on the boards clamour for Moore in OHMSS but I don't think his style would work with Hunt.

Yes I've been thinking about this recently and I'm afraid I'm come to the conclusion that it would have been so much better to have Roger Moore in OHMSS. Bond drifting around the resorts of Portugal being a playboy and visiting casinos and being suave? That was pretty much what Roger had been doing for years in the Saint and he'd do it again in the Persuaders: the opening of that film is made for him, and arguably Lazenby looks a little shifty and cocky in those scenes compared to how at home you can picture Roger being there. Roger could easily have held the screen next to Rigg and Savalas, which George couldn't, and the more sensitive and romantic sides Bond had to show in the film were something that you'd get plenty of glimpses of in his Bond films. Connery never did any of that. Plus he'd have brought something, some charm and glimmer and a comedy angle to the Hilary Bray scenes where Lazenby did nothing with them.
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.

mtm

j_w_pepper wrote: »

I can very well imagine Mason doing as well as Lonsdale with the same script. It would fit his personality as much. Come to think about it, they're not really that different in their general character. The role doesn't require any physical action, just the ability to perfectly deliver some of the best lines ever written for a villain in the entire franchise. Yes, Mason could certainly have done it. But not better (though probably no worse) than Lonsdale, so it would not have been an improvement.

Yes, Mason would have been great, but Lonsdale was great too so there's not much in the way of 'what-if' to consider.

I watched Mason in a film on Talking Pictures TV the other night where he played a character that should have been George Smiley (he was Smiley in the book but changed name for the film) and I think that's a greater what-if: he should have been Smiley in the movies.

mtm

mattjoes wrote: »

Considering Corinne Clery is French, it might have been too much to have two French girls. Perhaps they would've cast a French actress as Holly (since it was the larger of the two roles), but not for the part of Corinne Dufour. This would have required some script changes of course.

How would Corinne Clery have fared as Holly?

We got two Swedes in TMWTGG (and one was playing a British agent!) so it wouldn't have mattered I don't think. To be honest I think I'd find a French agent more refreshing than an American: you don't see DGSE agents onscreen very often.

mtm

mattjoes wrote: »

Forgive me for going back to an earlier "what if" for a moment, but before we change subjects again, I'd like to sneak in a few comments on the possibility of John Barry scoring NSNA, a subject that was originally discussed on page 24, and I wasn't around at the time to share my thoughts on it.

First, given it was the NSNA people who were after Barry, and not Barry after them, I'm sure he would've demanded authorship of the title song to accept the gig, rather than being forced to integrate someone else's composition into his score. Considering Michel Legrand composed the NSNA song in the end, I'm sure they would have accepted this condition for Barry.

Second, given Barry was still composing for Bond in those days, it's quite easy to imagine what a score for NSNA would've been like. A stately sound, with the music never reaching the frantic pace of earlier scores such as YOLT. Strings, brass and woodwinds would've been the bread and butter. There is this often-repeated idea that Barry adjusted his instrumentation of the scores, and/or of the Bond theme, to suit the current Bond actor-- the synths for Lazenby, the guitar for Connery, the strings for Moore. I think it's plausible, but not absolutely certain, to think this was true in the late sixties to early seventies. At the tail end of the Moore era and the beginning of the Dalton era, however, it seems more likely to me that Barry was just trying to keep things fresh for himself, rather than reshaping his music for changing actors (otherwise why the guitars in AVTAK?). Considering all this, would Barry have brought back the electric guitar for Connery in NSNA in some capacity? (Not to play the Bond theme, since he couldn't have used it.) Well, it's a possibility. I could see him integrating some non-orchestral instrument into his score, guitar or otherwise, to make it a little more interesting, however, I don't think this would have been because of the film or the lead actor, but simply to keep himself creatively stimulated.

Third, regarding the absence of the Bond theme in NSNA, it's interesting to note the AVTAK score, which is probably at least an hour long, contains about five minutes of the Bond theme, at most, but is unmistakably and effectively Bondian. (OP, by comparison, uses it a lot, but I believe that had to do with an effort to emphasize the "official" Bond brand against the competing NSNA.) So it's not like Barry really depended on the theme. As mentioned before, I'm sure he would've come up with a solid action theme for NSNA. However, the Bond theme isn't merely action music; it can also be used for suspense, mystery and intrigue. It's a musical summation and representation of all the Bond films have to offer, and of the character of Bond. It's a cool, exciting and dangerous composition. Would Barry have composed another "Bond theme" to make up for the absence of the original, with the purpose of using it as secondary musical material, much like he did in AVTAK? Would he have taken it in the same direction as the original theme? Let's remember Barry composed the 007 theme as an alternate Bond theme of sorts back in the sixties, and that was a fairly different piece of music. Or would have Barry done away with any kind of "Bond theme" and just employed his title song in instrumental form? I could see this happening. The song itself could have embodied the qualities of the original Bond theme, as it often did in his earlier scores --with bold, dramatic, seductive theme songs--, and could have been employed for action, romance or suspense. The song could have been the new Bond theme.

Very interesting thoughts. Yes I agree with all of that. With regards to the Bond theme I think it's interesting that Octopussy and AVTAK both have their own sort of alternate action theme (Gobinda Attacks and He's Dangerous) and then TLD got Necros Attacks, which isn't used for Bond quite as much as the other two but still serves the purpose (in fact the orchestral versions of the theme song probably work more for an action theme for Bond). So I think Barry was very much in that frame of mind at that time so it's reasonable to assume he'd have done it for NSNA.

I get kind of frustrated by that fanmade version of NSNA that ditches Legrand's score and inserts official Bond music. It's fairly well done but when David Arnold creeps in it just doesn't feel authentic: I wish the maker had just restricted himself to using tracks from maybe TMWTGG-TLD as that would have felt more like a Barry score from the time of the film.

mattjoes wrote: »

Fifth, had Barry agreed to score NSNA, it would no doubt have been an improvement over Legrand's work, especially in the action music. But even James Horner would have done much better.

Lastly, I think Barry would have never agreed to score NSNA. Doing that would've likely signified the end of both his working relationship with Cubby Broccoli, and his participation in the "official" Bond films. Even if he was nearing the end of his contribution to the Bond saga (something he might've known at the time, or not), to think of throwing it away for a single film made by the competition, whose franchise prospects were limited by legal reasons, would have been a very bad idea.

Yes indeed. I think it's very interesting that they still hired Pierce Brosnan after he attempted to get his own rival Bond movie off the ground with McClory: I wonder if they don't hold grudges too much if it means getting the best person for the job! :)

Herr_Stockmann

mtm wrote: »

Of course doing it in 1968 is no reason to think they'd do it any better but you never know.

It could have been different anyway, for better or worse, but that's another question. Knowing that the Solex subplot was only created in reaction to the 1973 oil crisis, a 1968 adaptation of TMWTGG would only be about Scaramanga, which is already a major difference. I never thought about it but seeing Bond racing against time to stop an assassination as you mentioned would be something great... And probably a better narrative perspective for a third act than the train ride from Fleming's novel!

mtm

Herr_Stockmann wrote: »

mtm wrote: »

Of course doing it in 1968 is no reason to think they'd do it any better but you never know.

It could have been different anyway, for better or worse, but that's another question. Knowing that the Solex subplot was only created in reaction to the 1973 oil crisis, a 1968 adaptation of TMWTGG would only be about Scaramanga, which is already a major difference. I never thought about it but seeing Bond racing against time to stop an assassination as you mentioned would be something great... And probably a better narrative perspective for a third act than the train ride from Fleming's novel!

It only occurred to me recently: it just makes sense when you've got an assassin as the baddie, doesn't it? Maybe he's killing someone to start a war or get access to some KGB funds or something, it doesn't really matter. It should be the Day of the Jackal, 007 style.

TMWTGG is an odd old film, I watched it last week and it's kind of weird that Bond basically goes after Scaramanga without any actual provocation (he's basically framed by Anders). Luckily it turns out he's got the Solex thing which justifies Bond's pursuit of him, but even then it looks quite like an act of greed on the UK's part as Bond says the oil companies will pay to keep the Solex quiet: is that the UK's plan too? ;) Gibson was working for Hi Fat when he developed the Solex, the British are actually trying to muscle in on it.

Scaramanga is guilty of industrial espionage (and murder of course, but these people are always going to find an assassin if they want one) but really the British and Bond are the aggressors towards him. It's all a bit odd. Bond isn't defending the realm here but going out and taking what the realm wants, and Scaramanga is the one Bond villain who actually looks the most like a victim of Bond.

thedove

Yes and M encourages it by saying he should go out and settle the dispute. I guess since they lost the reason that M sends him out from the books they needed something else was called for. I think your suggestion of Scaramanga on a mission to assassinate a world leader or such. But it wouldn't lend itself to have Bond jet setting. Good thought and an improvement on the plot of the movie. I never really bought the urgency of the solex agitator.

mtm

thedove wrote: »

Yes and M encourages it by saying he should go out and settle the dispute. I guess since they lost the reason that M sends him out from the books they needed something else was called for. I think your suggestion of Scaramanga on a mission to assassinate a world leader or such. But it wouldn't lend itself to have Bond jet setting. Good thought and an improvement on the plot of the movie. I never really bought the urgency of the solex agitator.

Well I do rather like the golden bullet thing, with Bond's life apparently threatened- that's rather good I think. So I'd still have Bond going out to get Scaramanga first, and Anders sending the bullet to alert Bond, maybe to Scaramanga's mission, is rather good. The film just falls apart after that.

bigladiesman

If Gerry Anderson finally managed to do his Moonraker, I would have picked Terry-Thomas as Drax. Reading the novel, he fits physically. 8-}

mtm

bigladiesman wrote: »

If Gerry Anderson finally managed to do his Moonraker, I would have picked Terry-Thomas as Drax. Reading the novel, he fits physically. 8-}

Ha! He does!

mattjoes

mtm wrote: »

mattjoes wrote: »

Considering Corinne Clery is French, it might have been too much to have two French girls. Perhaps they would've cast a French actress as Holly (since it was the larger of the two roles), but not for the part of Corinne Dufour. This would have required some script changes of course.

How would Corinne Clery have fared as Holly?

We got two Swedes in TMWTGG (and one was playing a British agent!) so it wouldn't have mattered I don't think. To be honest I think I'd find a French agent more refreshing than an American: you don't see DGSE agents onscreen very often.

I forgot about that! Still, had both of them been French, I do think it's likely one of them wouldn't have a played a Frenchwoman. I agree it would be interesting to see an agent of the French intelligence, to mix things up a little.

mtm wrote: »

I get kind of frustrated by that fanmade version of NSNA that ditches Legrand's score and inserts official Bond music. It's fairly well done but when David Arnold creeps in it just doesn't feel authentic: I wish the maker had just restricted himself to using tracks from maybe TMWTGG-TLD as that would have felt more like a Barry score from the time of the film.

I love that fan edit, and for the most part I can look past the lack of uniformity in the music, because the cues are generally well chosen and suit the respective scenes. The exception to that is indeed the Arnold music. The DAD music that plays during the horseback escape just doesn't fit.

mtm wrote: »

Yes indeed. I think it's very interesting that they still hired Pierce Brosnan after he attempted to get his own rival Bond movie off the ground with McClory: I wonder if they don't hold grudges too much if it means getting the best person for the job! :)

In Brosnan's case, at least he got involved with that rival Bond film after losing the opportunity to play the part in the EON film series (through no fault of his own, by the way). I can understand EON looking past that. Had John Barry agreed to score NSNA back in 1982/83, that would've been a different situation, because he would have chosen NSNA over OP. I'm sure Cubby Broccoli would have been upset about it, especially considering he had taken a bit of a gamble on Barry back in 1963, when he agreed to hire him to score FRWL, because yes, Barry had done the Bond theme arrangement for DN, but he was still new to the film scoring business.

mtm

Yes, agreed there.

Dragonpol

mtm wrote: »

bigladiesman wrote: »

If Gerry Anderson finally managed to do his Moonraker, I would have picked Terry-Thomas as Drax. Reading the novel, he fits physically. 8-}

Ha! He does!

Do you know something? He actually does! I'd never have thought of him for the role but he has all the attributes needed to successfully bring the literary Drax to life! And Drax was the ultimate bounder!

thedove

Great stuff about Drax and what Mason would bring to the role! Lets move on to another deleted scene and what effect if would have on the film.

TLD was a chance for the producers to shift the tone from the lighter Moore era to a more serious tone with Dalton taking over the role. However a light hearted scene was shot and while it was never finished in post production, the fact that time went into the shooting of the scene suggests that at one point it was going to be in the film.

The scene in question is the magic carpet ride scene. It would have followed Bond's escape from the police after the "assassination" of General Pushkin. The scene has Moore's Bond all over it and didn't fit within the film. However what if they had decided to include it. Do you think it would have confused the tone of the movie? Would it have undermined a great section of action with Pushkin's "death". Or do you think it is no worse then using a cello case to flee in the snow and should have been kept in the film.

What say you Mi6? What if the Magic Carpet Sequence had been left in TLD?

Revelator

The Magic Carpet scene can be viewed in the extras section of the Blu-Ray/DVD of TLD. It was eliminated not only because of tone but because it simply didn't come out right and would have required refilming. It feels drawn-out and awkward. If it had been kept, the comedic aspects would have done less damage than the slow pacing. In summary: conceptually no worse than the cello, but much slower and less effective. It was a gag that worked on the storyboard but not on celluloid.

IGotABrudder

I’m regretting not going to the cinema more. You don’t appreciate what you take for granted, I suppose, until it’s taken away.

Last film I saw in the flicks was Pet Sematary and it was rubbish, nowhere near as creepy as the 1980s tv miniseries.

But now I’m really glad I went to see it, because it was actually in the cinema. I don’t know when cinemas will reopen again. It might not be for ages.

It would be depressing if the last film I ever saw in any cinema was a rubbish version of Pet Sematary. So I hope they do reopen, and soon, so that I can go there at the earliest opportunity and see something else. NTTD, with any luck.

ToTheRight

The magic carpet bit would have to be tweaked substantially in the editing room to work. Even at that it's the kind of moment best left in the Roger era.

SaintMark

ToTheRight wrote: »

The magic carpet bit would have to be tweaked substantially in the editing room to work. Even at that it's the kind of moment best left in the Roger era.

that was a sheer Roger Moore moment that only he could have pulled of.

mtm

Yeah it's hard to consider it really because the version stuck in our heads is the rather boring and ragged version we see on the DVD. Maybe it would have been improved if edited better, but Tim stops being chased in order to slowly pay a man, he looks rather louche as he reclines on the very slowly sliding carpet, Eddie Kidd has a ridiculous moustache and the street set looks pretty rubbish and unconvincing.
I don't think it would have ruined the film or anything, but it just makes for a snappier scene without it. I could have taken that escape being a bit longer, it always feels like it cuts away a bit sooner than I'd like, but the version of the carpet ride they shot was a bit bad.

Herr_Stockmann

While this sequence seems out of place with Dalton, I think it could have worked with Brosnan, if he had been free for the role. Thus, if the magic carpet sequence had been left, it would only be, in my mind, with Brosnan as the star, infusing a lightness which did not work in the final product as demonstrated by the deletion of this sequence.

thedove

Herr_Stockmann wrote: »

While this sequence seems out of place with Dalton, I think it could have worked with Brosnan, if he had been free for the role. Thus, if the magic carpet sequence had been left, it would only be, in my mind, with Brosnan as the star, infusing a lightness which did not work in the final product as demonstrated by the deletion of this sequence.

I think you may have found the reason it made it into the script and was even shot. I think it would have worked with Pierce's Bond. I do think it was taken out for a reason as most deleted scenes are. It was a cute idea but poorly executed.

echo

The cello chase was just ridiculous enough. The carpet ride would have thrown the film over the top in a way that wouldn't have been helpful to Dalton's portrayal.

Herr_Stockmann

thedove wrote: »

I do think it was taken out for a reason as most deleted scenes are. It was a cute idea but poorly executed.

I do think so too. Regarding its execution with Brosnan, I think it gives some clues on on how the series could have evolved in term of tone through the late 80s and the 90s with a different Bond.

This allows me to go back to one of the first questions asked on the topic about what if Brosnan had starred in TLD. With this magic carpet sequence in mind, Bond 16 would have lighter than LTK and I doubt that the revenge story would have been used. I have no difficulty imagining that an installment similar to the Bond 17 treatment could have happened in 1989.

Agent_One

Speaking of LTK, I think it's a shame Brosnan never got a Felix Leiter to play off of. Wade and Falco hardly had much of a dynamic with him.

BT3366

I don't know that the scene would've been a deal-killer even if it were cleaned up and redone to look better, but it would've detracted in the moment. I've seen fans complain about the comic scene when the shower gets knocked over to reveal the guy in the Afghanistan scene. A friend of mine who I first saw TLD with and didn't like Dalton complained about the side view of Rubavitch in the Pushkin interrogation scene, turning into a prude suddenly about there not being nudity in Bond films.

I don't mind the cello case scene. Bond has always been about being resourceful with what he has at his disposal and he's just been through a gadget-rigged Aston Martin chase, so it wasn't a distraction. The overall tone of TLD does just fine to not reduce the overall experience of a more serious Bond film without losing the fun and creative action.

Also, I've heard conflicting things about the magic carpet scene, such as it was written with Moore in mind. Can anybody confirm or deny that? I always thought from the beginning that Bond 15 was meant to be a reboot, first with the rejected Bond begins angle and then the approach for a new actor. So it would seem strange to include a Moore touch unless they didn't want to distance themselves too far from that era.

Herr_Stockmann

BT3366 wrote: »

Also, I've heard conflicting things about the magic carpet scene, such as it was written with Moore in mind. Can anybody confirm or deny that? I always thought from the beginning that Bond 15 was meant to be a reboot, first with the rejected Bond begins angle and then the approach for a new actor. So it would seem strange to include a Moore touch unless they didn't want to distance themselves too far from that era.

As you said, Moore was never considered for Bond 15 as the first submitted treatment was sort of reboot / prequel, so TLD wasn't written with him in mind. However, the intention, after putting the Bond Begins angle aside, was to offer something classic that distanced itself from Moore without constituting a rupture. I guess when Brosnan was being considered, the ambition was to be more serious, but not too much either. This approach is not that different from that of FYEO, apart from its PTS.

Ludovico

I think it would have seriously hurt Dalton's tenure and public perception. Like he simply can't get off Moore's shadow or do his own thing. If anything it might even have shortened his tenure (big if but still).

thedove

I can see Pierce pulling off the carpet ride sequence. I think that's part of the charm with Brosnan and the trouble. The producers tried to make him "every Bond" and not give him something to call his own. So he is an amalgamation of Connery's and Moore's Bond instead of going one way. The sad thing is I think he was capable of doing something a bit more serious then what he was given.

I think the right decision was made with Dalton and this sequence. I think it would have been too much. The cello case chase had already done enough with the silliness of the situation.